 Rob AJets AFC ChampionshipPremium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ | Why? Why deploy vdsl when they are spending all this money on a superior fiber network? |
|
| Because like AT&T realized not every building can be backfited for fiber. I can not see why this was not done earlier. Instead of spending bucket full of buck on fiber to the home. Use fiber to move the CO closer to the customer to capture business to far for traditional DSL. |
|
JohnAPremium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA |
Watch what ATT ends up doing. The node in FTTN has to get within about 3000' of the modem. Then you have to pair bond it to try and get it to 50mbps. You can spend time and money playing with the phone lines, or you can do it right the first time, with FTTP.
|
|
|
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | said by JohnA:Watch what ATT ends up doing. The node in FTTN has to get within about 3000' of the modem. Then you have to pair bond it to try and get it to 50mbps. You can spend time and money playing with the phone lines, or you can do it right the first time, with FTTP. You are correct that best solution from an engineering point of view is FTTP. However, there are also financial and time contraints as well. VDSL will be an interum solution until FTTP is deployed. VDSL is going to be faster and less expensive to deploy.
Does it really matter what medium is used for communication as long as it provides the end users what they want? |
|
 lovswr
join:2001-09-15
Smyrna, GA | reply to richardpor
You have hit the nail on the head. If, for example, the cable companies had deployed FTTH instead of FTTN, all the Telco's would be dead by now. Constantly only looking at the short term, instead of focusing on the big picture is such a fault of current American busniess practices.
--
lovswr = good hivswr = bad |
|
| I think the cabelcos would be owned by the telcos if that happened. |
|
